Jump to content

No Holds Barred Thread - Post Anything That Is On Your Mind, Even the Politically Incorrect!


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, downzy said:

Again, nobody here knows or gives a fuck about the ancient connotation. The ancient connotation became less relevant when a group of people took the symbol to represent their murderous rampage that killed millions. The symbol continues to be used by modern day nazis in canada and elsewhere. The ancient connotation in Canada and elsewhere is irrelevant. 

You are being offended by the words ''good luck''. Congratulations.

Edited by DieselDaisy
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

All schedule 1 and 2 narcostics should be legalized for any use. Illegality of them does not prevent anyone that wants to from using and leads to crime costing millions. 

I love that Len is now famous for having a lisp and getting sucked off by swans. That'll teach you for calling me fat, Cuntface! @Len Cnut  

It's hilarious when I see staunch conservatives getting outraged over NFL players not standing for the National Anthem. They go on and on about all these rights we have but then demonize someone for e

Posted Images

7 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

You are being offended by the words ''good luck''. Congratulations.

But that’s not what it means to most Canadians.  Meaning is relative. And for the vast majority of Canadians the name and symbol does not mean good luck not matter how many times you want to remind them of the older meaning. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, downzy said:

But that’s not what it means to most Canadians.  Meaning is relative. And for the vast majority of Canadians the name and symbol does not mean good luck not matter how many times you want to remind them of the older meaning. 

It isn't an ''older'' meaning. It still means ''good luck'' in Sanskrit today - this is never going to change. This is a linguistic thing as much as a historic thing. As I said, it is a given name in India, e.g., Swastika Mukherjee the Bollywood actress. Should Canada ban the given name of people with an Indian background?

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Just to reiterate for the third or fourth time.

The town was named 1907-08.

The Nazis were founded 1919-20.

It is therefore certainly the ancient connotation of prosperity, the reasoning behind this naming, and not the connotation connected with 20th century European fascism. 

There is therefore no reason on earth why anyone should be offended by Swastika, Canada. 

It's about what you associate it with now, not whether it is named after the Nazis or not. Do I have a problem with it personally? No. I understand what you're saying, but what I always miss in discussions like this is empathy. I didn't lose anyone in the war. Even if I did, I probably wouldn't care because that's not how I'm wired, but everyone is different... If there are people out there who are genuinely upset by the use of that name or the symbol, why would I have problem with them changing it? Why do we have to get so technical about this? To a lot of people the swastika is associated with one of the worst things that happened to mankind in recent history.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

It isn't an ''older'' meaning. It still means ''good luck'' in Sanskrit today - this is never going to change. This is a linguistic thing as much as a historic thing. As I said, it is a given name in India, e.g., Swastika Mukherjee the Bollywood actress. Should Canada ban the given name of people with an Indian background?

Its meaning in sanskrit is irrelevant.  The meaning and connotation supersedes whatever linguistic meaning had or has.  What is never going to change, or at least for a very long while, is the association it has with Nazis.  I'm not calling for a ban, but for Canadian towns and streets to still share a name with something that is communally reviled is a tough thing to defend.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

People of sensitive dispositions should probably stay away from languages in fact.  Even in a country as emotive on this period in history in accordance with post-war denazification policies as modern Germany, you will still discover today compounds like Fremdenführer. Apply for a driver's licence and you will be applying for a Führerschein. Similarly you'll still hear Volk a lot.

2 minutes ago, EvanG said:

It's about what you associate it with now, not whether it is named after the Nazis or not. Do I have a problem with it personally? No. I understand what you're saying, but what I always miss in discussions like this is empathy. I didn't lose anyone in the war. Even if I did, I probably wouldn't care because that's not how I'm wired, but everyone is different... If there are people out there who are genuinely upset by the use of that name or the symbol, why would I have problem with them changing it? Why do we have to get so technical about this? To a lot of people the swastika is associated with one of the worst things that happened to mankind in recent history.

But the entire association is based on ignorance (I also assume they would never be able to travel in Asia?)! Why promote and accommodate historic and linguistic ignorance? The Nazis themselves never used the term ''swastika'' after all. If people who had suffered under the Nazis 1933-45 overheard a term, it would not have been ''Swastika'' but ''Hakenkreuz'' which was overheard.

They are being offended by a fallacy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, downzy said:

Its meaning in sanskrit is irrelevant.  The meaning and connotation supersedes whatever linguistic meaning had or has.  What is never going to change, or at least for a very long while, is the association it has with Nazis.  I'm not calling for a ban, but for Canadian towns and streets to still share a name with something that is communally reviled is a tough thing to defend.  

Utter, colonial-minded, western arrogance!

I repeat the question. Do you believe there should be a ban in Canada on people of Indian descent called Swastika?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

But the entire association is based on ignorance (I also assume they would never be able to travel in Asia?)! Why promote and accommodate historic and linguistic ignorance? The Nazis themselves never used the term ''swastika'' after all. If people who had suffered under the Nazis 1933-45 overheard a term, it would not have been ''Swastika'' but ''Hakenkreuz'' which was overheard.

They are being offended by a fallacy. 

But how can you speak of ignorance when it provokes certain emotions? I think you're being too rational. Imagine an old Jewish person seeing a swastika and that being enough to take them back to the ghetto or Auschwitz and you're talking about technicalities on how old that term or symbol is. It's about what it represents now to a lot of people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, EvanG said:

But how can you speak of ignorance when it provokes certain emotions? I think you're being too rational. Imagine an old Jewish person seeing a swastika and that being enough to take them back to the ghetto or Auschwitz and you're talking about technicalities on how old that term or symbol is. It's about what it represents now to a lot of people.

Context is everything here. If that old Jewish person was in Europe and witnessed the flag of the Nazi party, or derivative, being unfurled, then I completely agree. If that Jewish person is offended by a term ''good luck'' in Sanskrit, a term that the Nazis never used, and/or is travelling through India and has just seen a one-thousand year old temple with a swastika on its facade, or met a person called 'Swastika'', then, whilst I have empathy for their emotive state, their offence will be based solely on error.

European antisemitism itself was based on ignorance, errors and assumptions. Medieval blood libel against the Jews for instance was based on a misunderstanding of the Passover. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Do you believe there should be a ban in Canada on people of Indian descent called Swastika?

Of course not.  But anyone with that name should probably opt to go by a different name if they don't want to be thought of as an asshole.  

10 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

If that old Jewish person was in Europe and witnessed the flag of the Nazi party, or derivative, being unfurled, then I completely agree.

What about a Jewish person or non-Jewish person seeing today the symbol continually being used by white nationalists and nazis.

  • Wow 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Context is everything here. If that old Jewish person was in Europe and witnessed the flag of the Nazi party, or derivative, being unfurled, then I completely agree. If that Jewish person is offended by a term ''good luck'' in Sanskrit, a term that the Nazis never used, and/or is travelling through India and has just seen a one-thousand year old temple with a swastika on its facade, or met a person called 'Swastika'', then, whilst I have empathy for their emotive state, their offence will be based solely on error.

Offence can often be based on error but that doesn't mean it can't provoke emotions. If I decide to grow a little moustach and go to a synagogue, if the people will get emotional or offended, you can just as easily say that they are wrong because it's based solely on an error since I happen to be a huge Charlie Chaplin fan and that is my only reason for having that little moustache.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Utter, colonial-minded, western arrogance!

I repeat the question. Do you believe there should be a ban in Canada on people of Indian descent called Swastika?

I know a guy named Swastik. Should I tell him to change his name?

of course not because the Nazi were a minority group that appropriated a religious symbol.

 

 

27 minutes ago, EvanG said:

But how can you speak of ignorance when it provokes certain emotions? I think you're being too rational. Imagine an old Jewish person seeing a swastika and that being enough to take them back to the ghetto or Auschwitz and you're talking about technicalities on how old that term or symbol is. It's about what it represents now to a lot of people.

So all Hindus and Buddhists are ignorant even though they make 47% of the Earths population and they are the ones who created the symbol and still use it today?

 

8 minutes ago, downzy said:
38 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

 

Of course not.  But anyone with that name should probably opt to go by a different name if they don't want to be thought of as an asshole

Wow that is actually racist

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gibsonfender2323 said:

So all Hindus and Buddhists are ignorant even though they make 47% of the Earths population and they are the ones who created the symbol and still use it today?

Yep, that's exactly what I said.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gibsonfender2323 said:

Wow that is actually racist

Not if they live in North America or Western Europe.  

Just now, EvanG said:

Yep, that's exactly what I said.

He won't argue and respond to what you said.  He's a waste of time.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, EvanG said:

Offence can often be based on error but that doesn't mean it can't provoke emotions. If I decide to grow a little moustach and go to a synagogue, if the people will get emotional or offended, you can just as easily say that they are wrong because it's based solely on an error since I happen to be a huge Charlie Chaplin fan and that is my only reason for having that little moustache.

As I have said, why should we be sustaining offense based on ignorance? This seems to be an entirely anti-intellectual way of proceeding through life, and not dissimilar to how Judaism itself was perceived within European antisemitism, involving cultural misunderstandings and mistranslation! 

6 minutes ago, downzy said:

What about a Jewish person or non-Jewish person seeing today the symbol continually being used by white nationalists and nazis.

Think I already answered that,

16 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Context is everything here. If that old Jewish person was in Europe and witnessed the flag of the Nazi party, or derivative, being unfurled, then I completely agree.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, downzy said:

Not if they live in North America or Western Europe.  

So that clears it you are officially racist. You said the people who make up 47% of the worlds population have no right to use their religious identity because of “muh feelings?”

 

So I guess we should get rid of all Christian and Arab names because of the religious slaughter that has gone on for the past thousand years

 

Edited by Gibsonfender2323
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'll travel to Saudi Arabia or Iran and start hanging posters of Muhammed.  The imagery means nothing to me.  Who cares if it deeply offends the locals.  Their problem, not mine.  

All this effort to defend the Swastika.

This is why we can't have nice things and guys like Trump gets elected.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, downzy said:

Maybe I'll travel to Saudi Arabia or Iran and start hanging posters of Muhammed.  The imagery means nothing to me.  Who cares if it deeply offends the locals.  Their problem, not mine.  

All this effort to defend the Swastika.

This is why we can't have nice things and guys like Trump gets elected.  

Or it  should be seen as the Swastika was in use for THOUSANDS of Years and the Nazis culturally appropriated a Sacred Religious Symbol to the majority of the earths population for their Evil Purposes?

 

 

How do you think all the 1.72 BILLION Hindus feel that their religion was used for this?

 

Edited by Gibsonfender2323
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gibsonfender2323 said:

It’s a waste of time to argue anymore. Yet we are the racist ones 🙄

Apparently Indians called ''prosperity'' should change their name for fear of being thought of as an ''asshole'' when visiting Canada because a bunch of people in Canada are too stupid about linguistics and history and might get offended!

That is what he is essentially saying!

Edited by DieselDaisy
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gibsonfender2323 said:

Or it  should be seen as the Swastika was in use for THOUSANDS of Years and the Nazis culturally appropriated a Sacred Religious Symbol to the majority of the earths population? 
 

 

That would be fine if Nazis didn't continue to use it. 

325px-Charlottesville_'Unite_the_Right'_

Charlottesville, Virginia, 2017.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...